₦airaland Forum

meobizy:
99.9% of answers: Of course, I love God. How will you say otherwise?

The truth behind those 99.9%: Utter fear of suffering in the afterlife. Those already in penury afraid to continue in the next life.

0.1%: I don’t believe in the supernatural. Once you die, your story ends.

so you are an atheist

adecares:
This is true, people practice satanism, they fear hell fire so much that that fear surpasses their love for God.
If you claim to love God, you would naturally detest everything contrary to him.

do u fornicate

October1960:
No such thing as god or hell. All made up fantasy stories.

Wake up and face reality.

so you dont believe in God

See you gods here, our ancestors was worshipping trees but today we was rubbers, plastic..

If you tell them the truth, they will begin explain why you need to be in spirit to understand how the bible works...

So what is spiritual about worshipping an Argentinian woman as a God...

saintopus:
You are very correct, 97% of Nigerians in the mosques or churches don't believe in hell or heaven, but they only want their condition to be better. That's all!
That's why when most of them relocate abroad, they either stopped all religious activities or do so minutely.

I've you given your life to christ?

HacheNoire:
Which maker? The one you were told or the one you saw?

Catfish pepper soup is real. At consumption, you are filled, refreshed and energized.

Can your God make you feel same way? No!

how do you cope as an atheist

We are now jumping into conclusions?

potland:
so you are an atheist

God loves me where else will I wanna be if not with him, Devil is gonna be in hell with is demons and followers why will I want to be in such a place

I fear hell because am naturally stubborn but I love to an answering father called God.

I know a lady always preaching about zero hour come to JESUS. So if u reason am well her type is afraid of hell not like she really loves JESUS

Kemical23:
See you gods here, our ancestors was worshipping trees but today we was rubbers, plastic..

If you tell them the truth, they will begin explain why you need to be in spirit to understand how the bible works...

So what is spiritual about worshipping an Argentinian woman as a God...

You guys always get it wrong! Catholics dont worship mother Mary, they only honour her. So what about all other preaching there and things like holy communion, is it still about mother Mary?! Take a chill

EmekaBlue:
You guys always get it wrong! Catholics dont worship mother Mary, they only honour her. So what about all other preaching there and things like holy communion, is it still about mother Mary?! Take a chill

can you swear that you don't have the picture of that white Jesus in your house...

Stephen0mozzy:
Gbam. That's why I believe death bed repentance is just bobo.

So if you think you can be unholy all through your life, and then do Pascal's Wager, then you nor really understand nothing 😅

Pascal's Wager is a poor argument for christianity

jaephoenix:
Pascal's Wager is a poor argument for christianity

Read the comments again. This time, to understand the way it was used, not to nitpick just because you have heard the word before.

Kemical23:
can you swear that you don't have the picture of that white Jesus in your house...

Yes. I can swear I don't have. Those styles are kinda old school now

potland:
how do you cope as an atheist

It makes me use the full potentials of brains. Asking critical questions, researching and getting answers and solutions.

It makes my view and stakes broad and limitless.

Though if I must confess, I use religion as a tool same way the colonial masters used it. I can use it to create and divide, use as a tool to get to something, or make references to sell something. It’s one tool that softens the mind of those already conquered.

In a nutshell, being one has made me known I am the God of my own world.

thomas2024:
Oga stop lying. You’re still lying joor😅
Most people serve God for selfish reasons

See painment ooo.

Good thing you said "most" not "all". So you sef don answer yourself!

My perspective on life, the ALL, and nature changed when i started reading the KYBALION.

I will advice everyone to get a copy and read it.

it will broaden our minds.

EmekaBlue:
Yes. I can swear I don't have. Those styles are kinda old school now

but you're a Christian...

Rensheng:
Very good question indeed.

Previously for me it was the fear of hell.

But I have seen that, that alone is wrong in itself. For to follow a person because of the fear of pain indeed shows you do not want that person which of course God rightly reads as you do not want him and rejects you.
Which is the same as following a person because of the pleasures you can get. Both are wrong.

So now, I choose to Love Him and follow Him for Himself sake.

You don't choose to love someone.
Love is an expression of how you truly feel about something or someone. If there's nothing to love about someone, you can't choose to love them, that would be pretending. So love should come naturally and not out of choice.

Kemical23:
but you're a Christian...

Yes. But my type doesn't go to church all the time. We believe the good is in the heart of men

I genuinely love God. He is everything to me. He is truly a good God. He is awesome. He is kind. He watches over me constantly with love. He tells me in Jeremiah 31:3 "For I have loved thee with an everlasting love; with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.

God is love. He loves us His children deeply. His love is unfathomable. Why woudn't anyone love God? All we have comes from Him. Our lives belong to Him. He knows all our future achievements. And He is good to all. Yes, God deserves to be loved because He is kind and mercuful. And all power belongs to Him.

In conclusion, Jesus says in Matthew 22:37
"Love the LORD thy God with all of your heart, and with all.of your souod and all of your mind"

Yes, I truly love God but His love for me is infinitely more. I do not consider the fear of hell. That's never what makes me love God. Jesus has gone ahead to prepare a place for all of us who believe in God the Father and also believe in Jesus.

O come and taste and see that the LORD is good. Psalm 34:4 Amen

AlbertNewton:
You don't choose to love someone.
Love is an expression of how you truly feel about something or someone. If there's nothing to love about someone, you can't choose to love them, that would be pretending. So love should come naturally and not out of choice.

You are wrong!

And even you know you are wrong for though on one hand you said you don't choose to love, only you yourself cancelled your own statement by acknowledging that you can choose to though you chose to call that choice pretence!

So it's about your choice for if you can choose to love pretentiously then you can choose to love bonafidely.

So you see choice at work again!

Rensheng:
See painment ooo.

Good thing you said "most" not "all". So you sef don answer yourself!

Lol, you’re part of those “most”. Abi na lie?😅

TenQ:
You don't even have an understanding of what you believe before crucifying what others believe.

The saying that "A compound fool says in his heart that God doesn't exist" is very very true!

SMH!

Obviously "the bigger compound fool declares it out loud that it does, despite no shred of evidence". " It's" very very true seeing as indoctrination is a powerful drug 🤧

potland:
so you dont believe in God

Believe in which of the gods, like legion they're many.

Lucifyre:
Obviously "the bigger compound fool declares it out loud that it does, despite no shred of evidence". " It's" very very true seeing as indoctrination is a powerful drug 🤧

Good!
Are you willing to be quizzed on this: lets see how well you can think.




1. You challenged the apparent "lack" of evidence for God: What kind of evidence do you think will suffice for you as evidence for the Creator?

2. Since science agree that the universe has a beginning at about 13.8billion years ago, what in your opinion allowed the simultaneous creation of time, space and matter from NOTHING?

Oya, Mr knowledgeable, I am waiting! Just two elementary questions.


To help you, factor in Entropy and any relevant Physical , Chemical laws or use of rules of Logic.

thomas2024:
Lol, you’re part of those “most”. Abi na lie?😅

Now you don change post after how many days abeg, you no get anything wey you wan talk other than trying to place your own guilt on me.

The fact that you carry am for head shows your problem so stop self projecting and face yourself!

TenQ:
Good!
Are you willing to be quizzed on this: lets see how well you can think.




1. You challenged the apparent "lack" of evidence for God: What kind of evidence do you think will suffice for you as evidence for the Creator?

2. Since science agree that the universe has a beginning at about 13.8billion years ago, what in your opinion allowed the simultaneous creation of time, space and matter from NOTHING?

Oya, Mr knowledgeable, I am waiting! Just two elementary questions.


To help you, factor in Entropy and any relevant Physical , Chemical laws or use of rules of Logic.

So to preface, truth is, I don't even know whether to chuckle or sigh. You really thought you dropped something. I honestly don't know how you guys do the whole confident thing while being ignorant about the basic claims you're making. It reminds me of the Dunning–Kruger effect—basically, overestimating your understanding precisely because you don't yet understand how much there is to understand.

Like asking why goats don't come out of fruit seeds when it is known chickens do from eggs. It honestly makes no sense.

Anyways, to your questions:

1.) The very exact same evidence that would suffice for you to know Humbaba, the Almighty Creator, created the parent universe, Simna, which gave birth to our universe.

The same evidence that adequately distinguishes between Humbaba created Simna → our universe, YHWH created our universe, and a natural explanation of our universe — one that doesn't hide in gaps in our knowledge and ignorance, but one that indeed demonstrates that it was created. Who is Humbaba, you ask?! Exactly.

What evidence would suffice is not it. It's what you can demonstrate to be factual that enables you to know something as a matter of fact not an opinion. Quite easy. So you should be able to demonstrate that the Earth was indeed created, that it was created by a single creator and not multiple creators, and that this single creator is not Humbaba nor any of the other numerous claimants.

2.) Please, I would like you to point me to this scientific "consensus" by referencing a reputable, peer-reviewed paper, journal, or scientist that states, as an established fact, that the universe absolutely had a beginning 13.8 billion years ago.

Should be easy to show said concensus, since science has established factually, that the universe itself had a beginning, so I can then answer your question.

Similarly, I would like you to reference a peer-reviewed paper where science demonstrated as established fact that there is such a thing as “nothing,” in objective reality and that there was a point of absolute nothingness.

Or maybe since you know, you can demonstrate for us how “nothing” is no more than an abstract human concept and is, in fact, present in objective reality—as well as that there was a point when there was this “nothing” which you know.

Should be straightforward, so I can answer your "elementary" question(s) 2.

Lucifyre:
So to preface, truth is, I don't even know whether to chuckle or sigh. You really thought you dropped something. I honestly don't know how you guys do the whole confident thing while being ignorant about the basic claims you're making. It reminds me of the Dunning–Kruger effect—basically, overestimating your understanding precisely because you don't yet understand how much there is to understand.

Like asking why goats don't come out of fruit seeds when it is known chickens do from eggs. It honestly makes no sense.

I no send you this: Irrelevant talk!

Lucifyre:
Anyways, to your questions:

1.) The very exact same evidence that would suffice for you to know Humbaba, the Almighty Creator, created the parent universe, Simna, which gave birth to our universe.

The same evidence that adequately distinguishes between Humbaba created Simna → our universe, YHWH created our universe, and a natural explanation of our universe — one that doesn't hide in gaps in our knowledge and ignorance, but one that indeed demonstrates that it was created. Who is Humbaba, you ask?! Exactly.

What evidence would suffice is not it. It's what you can demonstrate to be factual that enables you to know something as a matter of fact not an opinion. Quite easy. So you should be able to demonstrate that the Earth was indeed created, that it was created by a single creator and not multiple creators, and that this single creator is not Humbaba.

I don't know your Humbaba and moreover, It was YOUR criteria I asked for. Since apparently you know Humbaba, what is their criteria?
The question was very simple:

So, again:
1. You challenged the apparent "lack" of evidence for God: What kind of evidence do you think will suffice for YOU as evidence for the Creator?

Lucifyre:
2.) Please, I would like you to point me to this scientific "consensus" by referencing a reputable, peer-reviewed paper, journal, or scientist that states, as an established fact, that the universe absolutely had a beginning 13.8 billion years ago.

Should be easy to show said concensus, since science has established factually, that the universe itself had a beginning, so I can then answer your question.

Similarly, I would like you to reference a peer-reviewed paper where science demonstrated as established fact that there is such a thing as “nothing,” in objective reality and that there was a point of absolute nothingness.

Or maybe since you know, you can demonstrate for us how “nothing” is no more than an abstract human concept and is, in fact, present in objective reality—as well as that there was a point when there was this “nothing” which you know.

Should be straightforward, so I can answer your "elementary" question(s) 2.

Evasive as usual, I made a claim. make your own counterclaim or disprove the claim of the universe.

Unfortunately, you could have gotten the answer easily ifnyou are not intellectually lazy

Planck Collaboration, Astronomy & Astrophysics — The Planck 2018 cosmological parameters paper reports an age of 13.787 ± 0.020 billion years under the base [\Lambda] CDM model, which is commonly rounded to 13.8 billion years
OR
Planck result overview, Astronomy & Astrophysics — The Planck 2018 overview paper also gives an age of 13.797 ± 0.023 billion years, again consistent with about 13.8 billion years

WRT to the highlight in Yellow you are the one trying to force a certain narrative of the word NOTHING as objective reality as I did NOT qualify NOTHING other than the normal use of absence of Matter. Or you think matter had always existed?

Now, enough with the digression, please answer my question.


2. Since science agree that the universe has a beginning at about 13.8billion years ago, what in your opinion allowed the simultaneous creation of time, space and matter from NOTHING?

maureensylvia:
Atheists ejugo ebeaa chai

Maureensylvia! Long time!

tosyne2much:
Maureensylvia! Long time!

Awwww long time gee😬
How have you been?!